the ethnological notebooks of karl marx - Marxists Internet Archive

übte einen grossen Einfluss a u f human mind, rief new elements o f characterw ach; property became tremendous passion im barbarian des heroic age.(“ booty and beauty” ). D agegen nicht haltbar archaic u. later usages. [HerrLoria! voila the w orkin g o f passion!)] Monogamy had assured the paternity27 o f | children u. maintained u. asserted their exclusive right to inherit theproperty o f their deceased fathers.Germans, w hen discovered, in Upper Status o f Barbarism, used iron, inlimited quantities; had flocks and herds; cultivated cereals; manufacturedcoarse textile fabrics o f linen and woolen, had not attained the idea o f individualownership in lands. F olg t daher: individual property in land unknown in A siau. Europe in M iddle Period o f Barbarism, came in in Upper Period. BeiHebrew tribes individual ownership in lands existed before the com m encemento f their civilisation. T h ey came out o f barbarism, w ie d. A ryantribes, mit possession o f domestic animals u. cereals, iron u. brass, gold andsilver, fictile wares u. textile fabrics. A b er ihre knowledge o f field agriculturelimited in Zeit Abraham s. N ach Reconstruction d. H ebrew society, nachdem E xodus, on basis o f consanguine tribes, to w hich on reaching Palestineterritorial areas w ere assigned, shows that civilisation found them undergentile institutions, b elow a know ledge o f politica l society. Inheritance wasstrictly in the phratry u. probably in the gens “ the house o f the father” __A fter children had acquired an exclusive inheritance, daughters succeededin default o f sons; marriage w ould then transfer their own property from theirown gens to that o f their husband, unless some restraint, in the case o f heiresses,was put on the right. Presum ptively u. naturally marriage within the gensprohibited; question came before Moses as a question o f Hebrew inheritance,v o r Solon as a question o f Athenian inheritance, the gens claiming a param ountright to its retention within its membership; sie beide entschieden in demselbenSinn. Same question m ust have turned up in Rome u. in part metby the rule that a marriage o f a fem ale w orked a diminutio capitis u. w ith ita forfeiture o f agnatic rights.Andre question involved in the issue: w ar marriage to be restricted by the ruleforbidding it within the gens, or become free, the degree, and not the fa c t o f kin,being the measure o f lim itation! Letztere Lösung siegte.Zelophehad starb, Hess Töchter, keine Söhne, u. die inheritance given to theformer. Später diese T öch ter about to marry ausserhalb the tribe o f fosephw ozu sie belonged; the members o f the tribe objected to such a transfer o fproperty, brachten Suite v o r M oses.D iese Burschen präsentiren d. Suite so:“ I f they be married to any o f the sons o f the other tribes o f the childreno f Israel, then shall the inheritance be taken from the inheritance o f our fathers,and shall be p u t to the inheritance o f the tribe w hereunto they are received :so shall it be taken from the lot o f our inheritance.” (Numbers, X X X V I , 3)83M oses84 antwortete:“ T h e tribe o f the sons o f Joseph has spoken w ell. This is the thing w hich136